Kerala High Court Dismisses Delayed Writ Petition Seeking GST and Penalty Refund paid during Jewellery Interception [Read Order]

The taxpayer requested completion of adjudication on goods seized under section 129, for which they had paid tax and penalty, along with issuance of FORM GST MOV-09 and summary in FORM GST DRC-07 to aid in potential appeals.
Kerala High Court - Delayed Writ Petition - Writ Petition - GST - Penalty Refund - taxscan

The Kerala High Court has dismissed a delayed writ petition seeking the refund of demanded Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) and penalty paid during the interception of jewellery as no confiscation order was passed. 

The Petitioner is a private limited Company and, according to the averments made in the writ petition, it is engaged in the business of jewellery. The petitioner’s consignment of jewellery worth Rs.58,21,206/- was intercepted as it was not accompanied with relevant documents as is mandated under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST)/State Goods and Services Tax (SGST) Act and the Rules made thereunder.

The jewellery items were seized and an order was passed determining tax and penalty. The petitioner had remitted the demanded tax and penalty of Rs.3, 59,750/- and thereafter the ornaments seized were released to the petitioner, as per order dated 18.12.2017.

The petitioner filed an appeal against the said order on 25.5.2019 which came to be rejected on the ground of delay.

In 2024, the petitioner approached the Court seeking following prayers:

  1. Issue a writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, calling for the records leading to appellate order, and quash the same.
  • Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent officer to complete the adjudication with respect to the goods confiscated under section 129 from the petitioner in respect of which petitioner has paid tax and penalty to release the goods and issue an order in FORM GST MOV -09 and summary of order in FORM GST DRC -07 to facilitate petitioner to file appeal if the proceedings are passed against the petitioner.
  • Alternatively, to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3rd respondent to refund the tax and penalty collected from the petitioner since no orders are passed so far with respect to the confiscation.

However, Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh, presiding over a Single bench, deemed the belated writ petition lacking in substance and subsequently dismissed it. Consequently, any pending interlocutory application associated with the current writ petition has also been dismissed.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates